Official LRC President Joseph R Biden Thread

agip wrote:

Trollminator wrote:

You can always count on the "conservatives" to twist themselves up in contradiction.

Gotta love the inconvenient fact that the aging mouth breathers still largely look to cable "news" opinions to inform them on domestic and world affairs, hence the massive discrepancy in viewership as the younger D base has quickly shifted away. I would not be proud of the above stat.

it's more than that...there's only one right wing media outlet, so every rube watches Fox. Which makes their numbers look big.

whereas there are multiple actual news outlets that educated non-rubes watch. Add together all the actual news outlets and their viewership is far above Fox News viewership. But spread out, each show is behind Fox.

Of course, one needs NO relative numbers to know that it's dumb to show off about Fox viewership. If viewership of non-Fox networks was exactly zero, we'd STILL know that their prime time hosts, and others, blatantly lie to their viewers constantly. And those viewers eat it up. And they keep feeding it, and enjoy spending the revenue.

"At least 3.8M viewers (stupid, undemocratic Americans) enjoy getting lied to every night."

Awesome!

We set new record for Bidenomics. A trade deficit over $1T.

https://freebeacon.com/latest-news/us-trade-deficit-tops-1-trillion-for-first-time/

Lets go Brandon!

#FJB

Breyer is retiring.

Two questions:

1. Will any Republicans vote "yes"?

2. If not, will Manchin or Sinema switch parties and vote "no"?

(If they vote "no", they will be thrown out of the D party anyway.)

Fat hurts wrote:

Breyer is retiring.

Two questions:

1. Will any Republicans vote "yes"?

2. If not, will Manchin or Sinema switch parties and vote "no"?

(If they vote "no", they will be thrown out of the D party anyway.)

1. Maybe 2-5.

2. Obviously not.

Hardloper wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

Breyer is retiring.

Two questions:

1. Will any Republicans vote "yes"?

2. If not, will Manchin or Sinema switch parties and vote "no"?

(If they vote "no", they will be thrown out of the D party anyway.)

1. Maybe 2-5.

2. Obviously not.

Eh, it depends. If enough Republican votes have been secured then maybe they'll be able to vote "No" if the nominee is like, particularly unpopular or polling terribly in that state. Not very likely though.

Fat hurts wrote:

Breyer is retiring.

Two questions:

1. Will any Republicans vote "yes"?

2. If not, will Manchin or Sinema switch parties and vote "no"?

(If they vote "no", they will be thrown out of the D party anyway.)

What would happen if Kamala Harris is nominated for the Supreme Court and there is a 50-50 tie in the Senate. She obviously can't cast the deciding vote in her own confirmation hearing. Who would then get to cast the deciding vote?

Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

Breyer is retiring.

Two questions:

1. Will any Republicans vote "yes"?

2. If not, will Manchin or Sinema switch parties and vote "no"?

(If they vote "no", they will be thrown out of the D party anyway.)

What would happen if Kamala Harris is nominated for the Supreme Court and there is a 50-50 tie in the Senate. She obviously can't cast the deciding vote in her own confirmation hearing. Who would then get to cast the deciding vote?

I know of nothing in the Constitution that says Harris could not vote for herself. Why do you think she can't cast the deciding vote? It would be an interesting situation though.

Fat hurts wrote:

Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:

What would happen if Kamala Harris is nominated for the Supreme Court and there is a 50-50 tie in the Senate. She obviously can't cast the deciding vote in her own confirmation hearing. Who would then get to cast the deciding vote?

I know of nothing in the Constitution that says Harris could not vote for herself. Why do you think she can't cast the deciding vote? It would be an interesting situation though.

You generally can't vote on matters related to yourself. I mean just think about it ... we are looking at the Supreme Court confirmation hearings for VP Kamala Harris and she comes in to break the ties and votes for herself. That stinks to high heaven.

Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

I know of nothing in the Constitution that says Harris could not vote for herself. Why do you think she can't cast the deciding vote? It would be an interesting situation though.

You generally can't vote on matters related to yourself. I mean just think about it ... we are looking at the Supreme Court confirmation hearings for VP Kamala Harris and she comes in to break the ties and votes for herself. That stinks to high heaven.

People are allowed to vote for themselves in various situations all the time.

It "stinks" to you because your small brain can't extricate itself from perpetual us-versus-them tribal thinking. And our country is probably in really bad trouble because tens of millions of others can't, either.

nonequals wrote:

Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:

You generally can't vote on matters related to yourself. I mean just think about it ... we are looking at the Supreme Court confirmation hearings for VP Kamala Harris and she comes in to break the ties and votes for herself. That stinks to high heaven.

People are allowed to vote for themselves in various situations all the time.

It "stinks" to you because your small brain can't extricate itself from perpetual us-versus-them tribal thinking. And our country is probably in really bad trouble because tens of millions of others can't, either.

I was going to respond to you but your post deserves no response.

Ghost of Disco Gary wrote:

I was correct about the unvaxxed truckers. This is where you say "fair" and move along. Take your L.

"Truck drivers from Canada and Mexico are among the travelers who will not be allowed to cross the borders into the United States unless they are fully vaccinated against COVID-19, effective Jan. 22."

https://www.truckinginfo.com/10160077/no-cross-border-trucking-for-unvaccinated-drivers

LOLz, if it really worked that way you would be taking Ls 24/7

Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

I know of nothing in the Constitution that says Harris could not vote for herself. Why do you think she can't cast the deciding vote? It would be an interesting situation though.

You generally can't vote on matters related to yourself. I mean just think about it ... we are looking at the Supreme Court confirmation hearings for VP Kamala Harris and she comes in to break the ties and votes for herself. That stinks to high heaven.

That is an extremely dumb post... even for you

Trollminator wrote:

Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:

You generally can't vote on matters related to yourself. I mean just think about it ... we are looking at the Supreme Court confirmation hearings for VP Kamala Harris and she comes in to break the ties and votes for herself. That stinks to high heaven.

That is an extremely dumb post... even for you

You have never once opened up the US Constitution. Sorry but your left-wing radical twitter crap is not news or earthbreaking. You are reading non-stop on radical leftist crap. That is why your mind is so messed up.

Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:

Trollminator wrote:

That is an extremely dumb post... even for you

You have never once opened up the US Constitution. Sorry but your left-wing radical twitter crap is not news or earthbreaking. You are reading non-stop on radical leftist crap. That is why your mind is so messed up.

Trollminator is right.

"That stinks to high heaven" is not a constitutional argument.

Hardloper wrote:

agip wrote:

shelves are not empty

sure, you can find some shelf somewhere that is empty.

but retail inventory levels have been about the same since March 2020, as you suggest. Even in the face of higher demand because of the booming economy.

Shelves are full but with a few shortages in a few items.

The invisible hand is successfully matching the increased demand since the stimuluses.

and today's inventory news suggests maybe stores bought too much. Maybe. We'll see. Maybe omicron just caused a blip and the demand will suck up all this new inventory.

Is this the metric your tweet is quoting?

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RETAILIMSA

Definitely not flat since March 2020

nah that's not it

I saw some chart showing the approximate level of 'fullness' retail shelves were. There were squiggles but pretty much unch since march 2020. Around 90%. it started with 3/2020 so I'm not sure how current levels compare to pre-plague levels.

Ghost of Disco Gary wrote:

agip wrote:

just a couple days ago:

you claimed trump ordered 20,000 national guard troops. False.

then you claimed 10,000. False.

truth is, he ordered ZERO nat guard troops.

then you claimed pelosi declined the troops. False.

then you claimed bowser declined the troops. false.

You never acknowledge that bowser was working with the DC nat guard the whole time.

You are a walking Facebook meme. You just go to FB, get a meme, put it in words, and post it here.

You are a rube, a joke.

You ignore soaring inflation

You keep saying the economy is booming

You keep saying Biden is doing a great job while the majority of America disagrees.

You only have the LR libs agreeing with you.

Stay delusional.

I do not ignore inflation. Inflation is a problem. It's a by-product of the booming economy. but it's not great.

Biden's doing fine sure. We're at peace, the economy is booming, great vaccines are free and accessible to anyone who wants one, there is no sedition, no insurrection, the deficit is shrinking, our houses have never been this valuable, the stock market hit new highs just a few weeks ago, the unemployment rate is a very low 3.9%, other nations respect us again, etc. That's all pretty good. The bad parts are inflation,rising crime and he hasn't brought the rubes back from the brink of suicidal maniacal moronitude.

But yeah biden's approval ratings are not good.

Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:

Trollminator wrote:

That is an extremely dumb post... even for you

You have never once opened up the US Constitution. Sorry but your left-wing radical twitter crap is not news or earthbreaking. You are reading non-stop on radical leftist crap. That is why your mind is so messed up.

LOLz, right let me listen to a deranged and perma-butthurt tzee who posts here 24/7 in hopes of overturning the election, because that would be sane

Yeah, but the FOX News assessment....

agip wrote:

Hardloper wrote:

Is this the metric your tweet is quoting?

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RETAILIMSA

Definitely not flat since March 2020

nah that's not it

I saw some chart showing the approximate level of 'fullness' retail shelves were. There were squiggles but pretty much unch since march 2020. Around 90%. it started with 3/2020 so I'm not sure how current levels compare to pre-plague levels.

Right, usual doomsday exaggeration from the left. I don't know what kind of backwater hellhole towns the likes of Sally and Gary reside in, but I haven't seen a single empty shelf (save for COVID testing kits recently and COVID PPE when it first hit us) or had to wait longer than usual for my Amazon deliveries. These mouth breathers are totally nuts and wishing so badly that the country collapses just because their orange hero lost.